writer, performer and activist Julia Serano's blog! most posts will focus on gender & sexuality; trans, queer & feminist politics; music & performance; and other stuff that interests or concerns me. find out more about my various creative endeavors at juliaserano.com

So the word “subversivism” pops up a couple of times in Excluded, but I first began using the
term in my first book Whipping Girl,
specifically Chapter 20, “The Future of Queer/Trans Activism.” While the word
had previously existed (Merriam-Webster
defines it as “the quality or state of being subversive”),
I began using it to describe a form of sexism that is quite prevalent within
feminist and queer subcultures, albeit absent from straight mainstream society.

In Whipping Girl,
I describe it this way:

Subversivism is the
practice of extolling certain gender and sexual expressions and identities
simply because they are unconventional or nonconforming. In the parlance of
subversivism, these atypical genders and sexualities are “good” because they
“transgress” or “subvert” oppressive binary gender norms. The justification for
the practice of subversivism has evolved out of a particular reading (although
some would call it a misreading) of the work of various influential queer
theorists over the last decade and a half. To briefly summarize this
popularized account: All forms of sexism arise from the binary gender system.
Since this binary gender system is everywhere—in our thoughts, language,
traditions, behaviors, etc.—the only way we can overturn it is to actively
undermine the system from within. Thus, in order to challenge sexism, people
must “perform” their genders in ways that bend, break, and blur all of the
imaginary distinctions that exist between male and female, heterosexual and
homosexual, and so on, presumably leading to a systemwide binary meltdown. [p.346]

There is nothing inherently wrong with celebrating and
praising supposedly “subversive” and “transgressive” expressions of gender and
sexuality (although the assumption that such activities undermine the gender
binary, or patriarchy, or what have you, seem rather dubious to me for reasons
that I discuss throughout the second half of Excluded). However, in practice, subversivism usually winds up
creating a new sexist double standard:

On the surface,
subversivism gives the appearance of accommodating a seemingly infinite array
of genders and sexualities, but this is not quite the case. Subversivism does
have very specific boundaries; it has an “other.” By glorifying identities and
expressions that appear to subvert or blur gender binaries, subversivism
automatically creates a reciprocal category of people whose gender and sexual
identities and expressions are by default inherently conservative, even
“hegemonic,” because they are seen as reinforcing or naturalizing the binary
gender system.

Subversivism doesn’t merely target the heterosexual
gender-conforming majority. In Excluded,
I discuss how transsexuals (see Chapter 12), femmes (see Chapter 6), and
bisexuals (see Chapter 9), in addition to other gender and sexual minorities,
regularly face accusations of “reinforcing patriarchy/heteronormativity/the
gender binary,” or of “not being queer/feminist enough” because of their
appearance, dress, or partner preference. Indeed, subversivism is a common
tactic that is used to marginalize and exclude these groups (and others) within
these movements.

Anyway, to continue:

To me, the most
surreal part of this whole transgressing-versus-reinforcing-gender-norms
dialogue in the queer/trans community (and in many gender studies classrooms
and books) is the unacknowledged hypocrisy of it all. It is sadly ironic that
people who claim to be gender-fucking in the name of “shattering the gender
binary,” and who criticize people whose identities fail to adequately challenge
our societal notions of femaleness and maleness, cannot see that they have just
created a new gender binary, one in which subversive genders are “good” and
conservative genders are “bad.” In a sense, this new gender binary isn’t even
all that new. It is merely the original oppositional sexist binary flipped
upside down. So now, gender-nonconforming folks are on top and gender-normative
people are on the bottom—how revolutionary!

Does subversivism
truly constitute a form of sexism?

I define sexism as any type of double standard (e.g., an
assumption, expectation, stereotype, or value judgment) based on a person’s
sex, gender, or sexuality. In Excluded,
I make the case that there are myriad double standards—some
which are pervasive, and others which are more temporary or fleeting; some of
which exist in mainstream society, and others which exist in specific settings
or subcultures; some of which we are aware of, and others which we are
oblivious to. And I make the case that, as activists, we should work to
challenge all double standards,
rather than ignoring some and reversing others.

Thus, while subversivism may not be prevalent in mainstream
society, we should be concerned by it and we should work to eliminate it.

I have had a couple people challenge me on this. Their
argument went something like this: People who are subversivist within feminist
and queer settings constitute an oppressed group, and as such, they do not have
the institutionalized power with which to oppress other people within their
communities. I find such views to be quite short-sighted, as they ignore the
very real material benefits that come from being considered a legitimate member
of a community or movement.

Take people who fall under the bisexual umbrella as an
example. Such people are often not fully accepted within queer movements and
communities, in part, due to subversivist attitudes that malign bisexuality as
inherently conservative and heteronormative. As I point out in Excluded:

Similarly, as I discuss in Whipping Girl, within many feminist and queer women’s settings, the
embrace of trans male/masculine folks and reluctance to accept trans
female/feminine folks is largely driven by subversivism, in that the former are
seen as “bold,” “rebellious,” and “dangerous,” whereas the latter are dismissed
as “timid,” “conventional,” and “safe.” I can tell you first-hand that not
having a community or movement that accepts you—whether it’s due to blatant
monosexism or trans-misogyny, or occurs indirectly via subversivism—has a very
real impact on one’s life and ability to survive in a world where we are
already marginalized by mainstream society to begin with.

You don’t use the
term subversivism that often in Excluded.
Why not?

When I first used the term in Whipping Girl, I used it to describe how subversivist attitudes
play out in contemporary queer/trans spaces, wherein trans male/masculine
identities are viewed as more subversive than trans female/feminine ones, and
where gender-blurring identities and expressions (e.g., drag, genderqueer) are
viewed as more subversive than binary ones (e.g., transsexual women and men).

However, different activist movements and communities may
deem different identities and expressions to be more (or less) subversive than
others. So for instances, trans-exclusive radical feminists tend to view drag
performers, genderqueers, transsexuals, and other transgender spectrum
identities as equally conservative (as we all supposedly “reinforce patriarchal
gender roles” in their eyes). Such feminists also tend to view BDSM and porn as
inherently conservative, whereas in more sex-positive/sex-radical circles those
same expressions may be celebrated as subversive and liberating.

So subversivism doesn’t function in the same way that we are
used to thinking about “isms,” as it does not target a specific group of
people. Rather, subversivism is perhaps better thought of as a mindset that
often arises within activist movements, and which provides a convenient excuse
for either perpetuating hierarchies that already exist within society, or to
create newfangled hierarchies within that specific movement. Given this, I
thought that it would be more fruitful to highlight the arbitrary nature of
these subversivist hierarchies more generally—I do this in multiple chapters of
Excluded, especially Chapter 12, ‘The Perversion of “The Personal Is
Political”’ and Chapter 16, “Fixed Versus Holistic Perspectives.”[note: If you appreciate this essay and want to see more like it, please check out my Patreon page]

3 comments:

I don't really have anything coherent to say here, just that I am intrigued by this idea.

A thing that I often think quietly to myself is "Femininity is subversive" -- not always, but that it can be, and that it often doesn't get enough 'credit' for that. Or that women, specifically, often don't get enough credit for the ways in which they have taken some of the expectations imposed on them and made them into something new. Like there can be a kind of furtive resistance to power in many expressions of femininity, or something.

But.. I'm not sure about that. Anyway, it's kind of interesting and weird to me to think about this in the context of subversvism, so thanks for that :)

I've been in online communities where nonbinary people look down on trans men for not having subversive identities (although these same people love the idea of trans women because they reject masculinity). I would say that subversivism describes what I've experienced.

I don't want to be a subversive "in your face" type of queer. I'm a modest and shy person in real life. I'm terrified of people sneering at me behind my back for being "one of those" people. I'm gender conforming but it's because I want to dress in a way that makes me comfortable. But I guess that's not a neutral way of being.

what you've experienced is the polar opposite of what I experienced a decade ago, when people in my queer/trans circles saw trans male/masculine folks as subversive & trans female/feminine folks as conservative & inferior.

Just goes to show how arbitrary (and problematic) these sorts of hierarchies are...

Julia's new music!

About Me

Julia Serano is an Oakland, California-based writer, performer, speaker, and biologist. She is the author of the recent book "Excluded: Making Feminist and Queer Movements More Inclusive" (Seal Press, 2013). Her first book "Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity" (Seal Press, 2007) has been used as teaching materials in gender studies, queer studies, social studies, human sexuality and psychology courses across North America.